Disposed

Prem Kumar Yadav v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC16 Jul 2018WRIA/12581/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court disposed of a writ petition concerning the petitioner's candidature in a police recruitment. The court directed the respondent to consider the petitioner's claim and the review medical board report to decide on his success status, treating him as belonging to the reserved category within two months. No new orders were required on the current hearing.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondent to consider petitioner's claim and medical board report within two months, treating petitioner as reserved category.

Prem Kumar Yadav Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others — Service and Employment | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 58 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 12581 of 2018 Petitioner :- Prem Kumar Yadav Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Vijay Kumar Pandey Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶2

Hon'ble Ashwani Kumar Mishra,J.

¶3

Petitioner had approached this Court by filing Writ Petition No.49920 of 2016, which was disposed of on 19.10.2016 by following order:-

¶4

" The petitioner stated to have appeared in the Physical Standard Test conducted on 27.08.2016 at the police lines, Sultanpur pursuant to a recruitment namely Police Constable and Constable PAC (Male) Direct Recruitment 2015 conducted by respondent no.3. The grievance of the petitioner is with regard to the measurement of his height by the Medical Board which has conducted the Physical Standard Test on 27.08.2016.

¶5

Only prayer made by the petitioner in the present writ petition is to issue a direction to respondent authority to place his grievance before the Review Medical Board.

¶6

To this prayer, learned Standing Counsel has no objection.

¶7

In view thereof, the present petition is being disposed of with the direction to respondent no.3 namely The Chairman, U.P. Police Recruitment and Promotion Board, Lucknow to consider the grievance of the petitioner and allow the petitioner to appear before the Review Medical Board which shall examine and take a decision in accordance with law.

¶8

The entire exercise shall be completed within a period of one month from the date of production of certified copy of this order after intimating the petitioner about the date of his appearance

¶9

before the Review Medical Board. It is needless to state that the petitioner has to co-operate and appear before the Review Medical Board on the date notified to him.

¶10

Disposed of."

¶11

It appears that in terms of the direction issued, the Chief Medical Officer, Sultanpur constituted a Medical Board, on the request of the U.P. Police Recruitment Board, Lucknow on 28.02.2017. The duly constituted Board has conducted medical examination of the petitioner and its report dated 16.03.2017 has been brought on record. The report has also been forwarded to the U.P. Police Recruitment Board on 17.03.2017. The grievance is that thereafter the authorities have declared final result without considering the report of the Medical Board forwarded by the Chief Medical Officer, Sultanpur on 17.03.2017.

¶12

While entertaining the writ petition following orders were passed on 24.05.2018:-

¶13

" By means of the present petition, the petitioner seeks to challenge the final result declared on 15.5.2018 pursuant to the U.P. Police Constable PAC direct recruitment examination 2015 on the ground that though the petitioner has qualified all stages of evaluation including Physical Standard Test conducted on 16.3.2017 by the Medical Board.

¶14

On the facts noted above and on the record placed at page '52' of the paper book, learned standing counsel is directed to seek instructions from respondent no.4 and explain as to why the candidature of the petitioner has not been declared successful despite clearing all stage of evaluation.

¶15

As prayed, put up on 5.7.2018 in the additional cause list.

¶16

In the meantime, it is open for the respondent Board to correct the result of the petitioner, if he is found successful."

¶17

Despite repeated adjournments allowed on subsequent occasions learned Standing Counsel has not been able to obtain instructions.

¶18

It is stated by the learned Standing Counsel that in case such report has not been considered so far, the same shall be taken into consideration and appropriate decision would be taken by the U.P. Police Recruitment Board, shortly, if the petitioner has otherwise obtained marks above the cut of marks in his category.

¶19

In the facts and circumstances noted above, this petition stands disposed of with the direction upon the respondent no.4 to accord consideration to the petitioner's claim, keeping in view the report of Chief Medical Officer, Sultanpur addressed to the 4th respondent, within a period two months from the date of presentation of certified copy of this order, treating him to be in the reserved category.

¶20

Order Date :- 16.7.2018 VKG

Prem Kumar Yadav v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Prem Kumar Yadav v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Manish Kumar Vs State of U.P. and 6 Others

Mohd. Usman Vs State of U P and 3 Others

Sunit Kumar Singh Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Smt. Pyaree Devi Vs State of U P and 3 Others

Vishnu Singh and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Rahul Singh Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others